Stuckey v. Trump
- Gonzalez Rogers
- 4:19-cv-03688
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 4
In Stuckey v. Trump, Judge Gonzalez Rogers granted fee-waiver status but denied counsel and a preliminary injunction without prejudice because procedural requirements were unmet.
Andre Kenneth Stuckey’s filing-fee obligations and requests for appointed counsel and preliminary relief were affected. The defendants were not yet served, and the underlying claims were left for separate screening.
What happened
In Stuckey v. Trump, Andre Kenneth Stuckey, a California state prisoner representing himself, filed a civil-rights lawsuit under a federal civil-rights statute. He also requested permission to proceed without paying the full filing fee at once, appointment of a lawyer, and a preliminary injunction.
The court granted permission to proceed without prepaying the filing fee, with a $1 initial payment and a $350 total fee. It denied the request for a lawyer because the case was at an early stage and Stuckey had adequately presented his claims. It also denied the preliminary-injunction motion without prejudice because the defendants had not been served and the required notice and emergency-relief requirements had not been met.
Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers said the court would separately screen the amended complaint to determine whether any claims could proceed. The order did not decide the underlying civil-rights claims.
The detailed version
- Stuckey v. Trump · No. 4:19-cv-03688
- Gonzalez Rogers
- Dec. 23, 2019
Background
Andre Kenneth Stuckey, identified as a California state prisoner, filed this civil-rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 while representing himself. The operative pleading was his amended complaint. He filed three related requests: permission to proceed without prepaying the filing fee, appointment of counsel, and a preliminary injunction.
Rulings
The court granted Stuckey’s application to proceed without prepaying the filing fee. The order states that the total filing fee was $350 and that the initial partial filing fee was $1. It directed the prison trust-account office to make payments under the statutory installment process.
The court denied the motion for appointment of counsel. It explained that a civil litigant generally has no constitutional right to appointed counsel unless losing the case could result in loss of physical liberty. Under the statute governing appointment of counsel for qualifying litigants, the court considers exceptional circumstances by evaluating the likelihood of success and the litigant’s ability to present the claims given their legal complexity. The court found that the case was at an early stage, making it premature to determine the likelihood of success, and that Stuckey had adequately presented his claims himself.
The court denied without prejudice the motion for a preliminary injunction. A preliminary injunction is an order issued before final judgment to provide temporary relief, and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65 generally requires notice to the opposing party. The defendants had not yet been served, so the motion could not be decided on that basis. The court also stated that Stuckey had not met the requirements for emergency relief without notice. In addition, the court first had to screen the amended complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A to determine whether it stated claims that could proceed.
Effect of the Order
The court stated that it would conduct the initial screening in a separate written order. If the case proceeded to briefing after the defendants were served, Stuckey could resubmit his preliminary-injunction motion. The order terminated Docket Nos. 2, 3, and 4. It did not decide the merits of the underlying civil-rights claims.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.